Geographical Indication (GI) options for Ethiopian Coffee and Ghanaian Cocoa

Innovation & Intellectual Property
if standards were introduced at a higher level and in an appropriate manner, they
would be respected. Without high-level standardisation, the goods in question
cannot exhibit an assurance of quality, creating potential challenges to establishing
and nurturing a successful certification or collective marks system. However,
at the same time, implementation of standardisation could potentially create
strong incentives for the use of certification marks by manufacturers, and could
trigger government interest and support.
The success of a communal trademark system also requires the existence of
an institution embodying ownership of the mark (UNIDO, 2010, p. 2). For the
Aba cluster (see Figure 5.1), organisational infrastructure was found to exist,
while the Itoku-Abeokuta and Kano clusters were found to have less (but still
some) organisational structure. The Itoku-Abeokuta cluster, for instance, had an
association of textile producers consisting mainly of the traders in the Itoku-
Abeokuta market. The existing organisational bodies in all three clusters were
providing administrative support, dispute settlement and disciplinary functions
to their members – therefore signifying an existing system and a ready-made
platform that could be harnessed to build a communal trademarks system at
the market level. The Aba cluster was noteworthy here. It was found that in the
Aba cluster, it was standard practice for there to be registration of labels and
designs with the Aba unions (as protection from copying by other members of
the union). The Aba unions were also providing support services and assistance
in the form of finance and logistics to their members. The unions were formulating
rules to protect the individual and collective interests of their members and
were enforcing these rules.
One of the major potential challenges to adoption of a communal trademark
by the Aba cluster was found to be the apparent lack of unity in the
management structure. It was found that market leaders were prone to fragmentation
and rivalry, due to competing interests. However, in the Itoku-
Abeokuta cluster (unlike the Aba cluster), management fragmentation was
not apparent. The traders’ association in Itoku-Abeokuta was found to have a
well-respected executive, headed by its Iya Oloja (executive head), which met
regularly as a team. The Iya Oloja also held periodic meetings with the traders
to discuss issues of common interest, to disseminate information, and to
try to foster communal wellbeing in the market. The Itoku-Abeokuta cluster
was therefore found to present an environment potentially more suited than
the Aba cluster to successful implementation of communal trademarks. Unlike
among the Aba respondents (where some misgivings were registered), the
Itoku-Abeokuta respondents expressed confidence in their executive team to
liaise with authorities to explore possible processes for establishing and using
communal trademarks.
120